Forum Post: Get lost trolls!
Posted 12 years ago on Feb. 9, 2012, 3:33 p.m. EST by JuanFenito
(847)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
Come on, you losers! Go back to watching Glenn Beck and salivating over pictures of Sarah Pukin and daydreaming about starving children while you pollute the environment. DO YOU LIKE THE STATUS QUO? Seriously, get lost. We are here to be productive and discuss positive change, so if you are not, would you mind getting lost? Thanks.
No - let them stay! I enjoy the entertainment and if they're wasting their time here; they are doing nothing to promote their cause somewhere else. Piss them off enough to keep them coming back!!
I support this idea.
We should being doing one of two things with the so called "trolls": 1) Educate Them using Peace and Love, or 2) Study them enough so we truly understand what makes their "cogs" tick.
Both of these approaches have a positive outcome.
You are being studied, like a lab rat.
I hate Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin, they're idiots. And I'm conservative.
why would you hate glenn for warning that our country was being destroyed, he was preaching this long before 2007, remember? Or did the infestation of the brainwashing affect you, remember like when hanna montanna was practically the only one producing rated g shows in concerts and a movie, and the general school children started hating her for no reason? Too bad cause she turned bad and they still hate her.
Perhaps it's because Beck bases his "predictions" on irrationality?
I have yet to have a conversation with a fan of his, that can carry on a rational conversation on ANY subject Beck has ever covered.
okay you start, what is so irrational about gleen becks predictions, and just to scratch the cover whilst i dust off my book called "Arguing with Idiots" where Glenn Beck is dressed as Hitler and makes the opening statement, "How to stop small minds and BIG GOVERNMENT". Do you disagree with this or what is your stance? I mean because I see alot of people in the OWS movement complaining about big government.
okay ill give credit where credit is due, there are alot of points in his book that are somewhat irrational, but they still make a point, and they are funny to read. I dont think the general population could follow him unless it happened to them. I follow some of them because I believe that when a person runs his own business, his eyes are opened in ways that the general population couldnt possibly understand, on many levels.
well this should be good, let me get my glenn beck material. LOL
Shooz is looking for his copy of "Rules For Radicals". LOL
LMAO, that made me laugh.
When they occupy the white house he can grab Obama's. Probably on his bedside table.
Well, so far a great many of his predictions have come true. Have you ever watched him on his shows or just seen clips of him on MSNBC?
can you tell me what exactly does that mean when you say you are a conservative?? what are you conserving?
While I tend to be a moderate/liberal, I have spoken with some intelligent, thoughtful conservatives whose judgment I trust. I think they are trying to conserve the Constitution and the rights of the States versus the Federal Government. Much blurring has happened under the Department of Commerce, and most conservatives feel too much power is in the central government. If that is correct, perhaps we can turn our government upside down: Make state laws absolutely controlling; the states collect taxes, from which they pay the central government for whatever services it provides. Those things that are in the hands of the central government could be very basic: social security/medicare, civil rights guarantee, border security, international affairs. State laws that circumvent these things can be challenged. Personally, I think healthcare should be a central government province since we move frm state to state so often. I also believe that corporations, not being human and therefore not being humane, need to have restrictions, but sensible ones. Since they are often global in scope, and always national, that pretty much means central government. Each state would have the ability to decide on personal, moral issues like pro-choice or anti-abortion, yes or no to gay marriage, drugs, etc. People could choose to live wherever they feel comfortable. Is this totally stupid? Probably; but it is a different way of seeing things, and I don't think that is ever a bad thing.
certainly not stupid - the labels have become so twisted that it is hard to know what is what. i doubt if many who call themselves conservative would like your social security or health care idea but i do! there is much to be changed with our system - creating a more democratic government seems to be the first step - state or federal.
I identify with a lot of the conservative ideologies, more so than liberal ideologies.
that really says almost nothing - tells me that you haven't though through your ideology - alan watts would say that an unexamined philosophy is a bad one - by definition
I make it a point to think through my ideologies. I am a true debater. I want to be able to defend my ideals if they come under attack.
good but what are they?
Well, I'm against abortion, mostly on a religion basis, but I believe it would be wrong to impose my beliefs on others. So unless I find empirical evidence that states that abortion will lead to a downfall in society I would actually vote FOR laws allowing abortion.
we agree - i do not want you, or the pope or the state to tell my daughter what to do with her life or body - i am not a fan of abortion but it is not my choice
I like to conserve money and energy. I conserve paper too.
Reuse! Insulate! Recycle! Conserve!
Beer, well that is another story....
do you like to conserve the planet - i understand the idea of conserving money but if we all did it really well we would all be poorer - no?
You guys really don't understand the economic system. Where do you think the money goes if it is conserved? Instead of buying a Big Mac, it is put into Wells Fargo Bank where the depositor receives a return. Now inside the Bank, they are liable for paying the depositor so they have to make money with it. They will lend it out at a higher rate. If they don't lend it out, they can either invest it by buying bonds or put it back to the Fed. The Fed also charges them for deposit insurance so putting it back in reserves is not profitable.
It's always in the system looking for investment. The key is good investments hence confidence.
are you saying people shouldn't save money? the whole system is ass backwards - did you read max neef below - here it is - MANFRED MAX-NEEF: First of all, we need cultured economists again, who know the history, where they come from, how the ideas originated, who did what, and so on and so on; second, an economics now that understands itself very clearly as a subsystem of a larger system that is finite, the biosphere, hence economic growth as an impossibility; and third, a system that understands that it cannot function without the seriousness of ecosystems. And economists know nothing about ecosystems. They don’t know nothing about thermodynamics, you know, nothing about biodiversity or anything. I mean, they are totally ignorant in that respect. And I don’t see what harm it would do, you know, to an economist to know that if the bees would disappear, he would disappear as well, because there wouldn’t be food anymore. But he doesn’t know that, you know, that we depend absolutely from nature. But for these economists we have, nature is a subsystem of the economy. I mean, it’s absolutely crazy.
And then, in addition, you know, bring consumption closer to production. I live in the south of Chile, in the deep south. And that area is a fantastic area, you know, in milk products and what have you. Top. Technologically, like the maximum, you know? I was, a few months ago, in a hotel, and there in the south, for breakfast, and there are these little butter things, you know? I get one, and it’s butter from New Zealand. I mean, if that isn’t crazy, you know? And why? Because economists don’t know how to calculate really costs, you know? To bring butter from 20,000 kilometers to a place where you make the best butter, under the argument that it was cheaper, is a colossal stupidity, because they don’t take into consideration what is the impact of 20,000 kilometers of transport? What is the impact on the environment of that transportation, you know, and all those things? And in addition, I mean, it’s cheaper because it’s subsidized. So it’s clearly a case in which the prices never tell the truth. It’s all tricks, you know? And those tricks do colossal harms. And if you bring consumption closer to production, you will eat better, you will have better food, you know, and everything. You will know where it comes from. You may even know the person who produces it. You humanize this thing, you know? But the way the economists practice today is totally dehumanized.
It doesn't matter how people save money it matters how people allocate and invest their money. If you forgo a Big Mac and take the money and start a successful company then McDonalds has lost the money and your company has gained it. It's all about the allocation. When you give the government the money, you are asking them to allocate for you.
I don't want economists and govenrment providing for my needs. I can do that very well myself and any human growth comes from my religion. Here in the US, we believe in liberty and allowing people to grow themselves and not depend on governemnt.
I have no idea about butter prices in the south of Chile, but if a butter manufacturer wants to sell his butter for cheaper then the butter manufacturer in Chile better repsond or the latter will lose marketshare. That's the beauty of competition.
Americans eat better food today than they ever have in their history so I am not sure about your comments regarding local food.
you do not understand what was said - too bad - and you say we don't understand the economic system - max neef put it very simply and you missed it. he is talking about economic growth - start with this - read it slowly - an economics now that understands itself very clearly as a subsystem of a larger system that is finite, the biosphere, hence economic growth as an impossibility; and third, a system that understands that it cannot function without the seriousness of ecosystems. And economists know nothing about ecosystems. They don’t know nothing about thermodynamics, you know, nothing about biodiversity or anything. I mean, they are totally ignorant in that respect. And I don’t see what harm it would do, you know, to an economist to know that if the bees would disappear, he would disappear as well, because there wouldn’t be food anymore. ...................now try this .......AMY GOODMAN: And if you’re teaching young economists, the principles you would teach them, what they’d be?
MANFRED MAX-NEEF: The principles, you know, of an economics which should be are based in five postulates and one fundamental value principle.
One, the economy is to serve the people and not the people to serve the economy.
Two, development is about people and not about objects.
Three, growth is not the same as development, and development does not necessarily require growth.
Four, no economy is possible in the absence of ecosystem services.
Five, the economy is a subsystem of a larger finite system, the biosphere, hence permanent growth is impossible.
And the fundamental value to sustain a new economy should be that no economic interest, under no circumstance, can be above the reverence of life.
AMY GOODMAN: Explain that further.
MANFRED MAX-NEEF: Nothing can be more important than life. And I say life, not human beings, because, for me, the center is the miracle of life in all its manifestations. But if there is an economic interest, I mean, you forget about life, not only of other living beings, but even of human beings. If you go through that list, one after the other, what we have today is exactly the opposite.
AMY GOODMAN: Go back to three: growth and development. Explain that further.
MANFRED MAX-NEEF: Growth is a quantitative accumulation. Development is the liberation of creative possibilities. Every living system in nature grows up to a certain point and stops growing. You are not growing anymore, nor he nor me. But we continue developing ourselves. Otherwise we wouldn’t be dialoguing here now. So development has no limits. Growth has limits. And that is a very big thing, you know, that economists and politicians don’t understand. They are obsessed with the fetish of economic growth.
And I am working, several decades. Many studies have been done. I’m the author of a famous hypothesis, the threshold hypothesis, which says that in every society there is a period in which economic growth, conventionally understood or no, brings about an improvement of the quality of life. But only up to a point, the threshold point, beyond which, if there is more growth, quality of life begins to decline. And that is the situation in which we are now.
I mean, your country is the most dramatic example that you can find. I have gone as far as saying — and this is a chapter of a book of mine that is published next month in England, the title of which is Economics Unmasked. There is a chapter called "The United States, an Underdeveloping Nation," which is a new category. We have developed, underdeveloped and developing. Now you have underdeveloping. And your country is an example, in which the one percent of the Americans, you know, are doing better and better and better, and the 99 percent is going down, in all sorts of manifestations. People living in their cars now and sleeping in their cars, you know, parked in front of the house that used to be their house — thousands of people. Millions of people, you know, have lost everything. But the speculators that brought about the whole mess, oh, they are fantastically well off. No problem. No problem.
Economics has been around a long as humans have been around and fraanky, this is a bunch of gobblegook written by I don't know who. What does he want, centralized government that decides on every investment decision and trains each person for a job, Do you think this hasn't been tried before and the results were poor.
You are so hung up on people getting rich you think they are stealing from you. They aren't. You could tax the entire 1% all of their money and give it to the bottom 1% and then were would be?
are you stupid - can you read? you have no idea what i think so go away - why do you bother - respond to the obvious truth of what he says or respond to someone else!
It doesn't seem like an obvious truth to me. Economics isn't that hard but you sure are making it hard. Why don't you worry about Chile an leave us in the US alone.
How do you conserve the planet?
The planet is way too big for me to consume.
yes but you are one of many - ever been to ireland - see any trees there - are you saying (like fat rush) that humans cannot overwhelm the planet or use up all of it's resources (well most anyway - or enough that we reduce population size greatly and disastrously)
So you mean preserve the resource on the planet. That is different I am for that.
You cannot save or destroy the planet. You can use up all the resources and perhaps become extinct but the trees and such will grow back after we are gone.
What is a fat rush? Is that like a reed or bamboo? Did they have a lot of those in Ireland? I don;t get your point.
yes of course - the resources of the planet - then you are an environmentalist!
I am not am not sure I would call myself an environmentalist. I would say I consider my impact on the environment and try to limit that impact. I do what I can.
As a cub scout leader I try to install that respect in the kids in my son's pack. Every year we clean up the river area, plant something at the school... When we go geocaching we cache in trash out.
you are an environmentalist! seriously we need to protect our environment - that much should be very obvious - air, water to say nothing of the resources. this system is destroying the planet and we need to try to do what we can to leave something for our children and grandchildren!
I only say I am not an environmentalist because the environment is not my top priority. I think for the "ist" to be attached to me that would need to be the case. There are times when folks go overboard protecting some lizard or turtle costing jobs and gains for human populations. Extinction is a part of evolution.
now we get back to conservative - yes extinction is part of nature but we don't need to speed up the process - i refer you to max neef! MANFRED MAX-NEEF: First of all, we need cultured economists again, who know the history, where they come from, how the ideas originated, who did what, and so on and so on; second, an economics now that understands itself very clearly as a subsystem of a larger system that is finite, the biosphere, hence economic growth as an impossibility; and third, a system that understands that it cannot function without the seriousness of ecosystems. And economists know nothing about ecosystems. They don’t know nothing about thermodynamics, you know, nothing about biodiversity or anything. I mean, they are totally ignorant in that respect. And I don’t see what harm it would do, you know, to an economist to know that if the bees would disappear, he would disappear as well, because there wouldn’t be food anymore. But he doesn’t know that, you know, that we depend absolutely from nature. But for these economists we have, nature is a subsystem of the economy. I mean, it’s absolutely crazy.
And then, in addition, you know, bring consumption closer to production. I live in the south of Chile, in the deep south. And that area is a fantastic area, you know, in milk products and what have you. Top. Technologically, like the maximum, you know? I was, a few months ago, in a hotel, and there in the south, for breakfast, and there are these little butter things, you know? I get one, and it’s butter from New Zealand. I mean, if that isn’t crazy, you know? And why? Because economists don’t know how to calculate really costs, you know? To bring butter from 20,000 kilometers to a place where you make the best butter, under the argument that it was cheaper, is a colossal stupidity, because they don’t take into consideration what is the impact of 20,000 kilometers of transport? What is the impact on the environment of that transportation, you know, and all those things? And in addition, I mean, it’s cheaper because it’s subsidized. So it’s clearly a case in which the prices never tell the truth. It’s all tricks, you know? And those tricks do colossal harms. And if you bring consumption closer to production, you will eat better, you will have better food, you know, and everything. You will know where it comes from. You may even know the person who produces it. You humanize this thing, you know? But the way the economists practice today is totally dehumanized.
Because I an not a environmentalist I am a conservative? Why do you feel the need to label me. I look at one issue at a time. I am not a "ist" or an "ive" I do not belong to a group.
you want to conserve the environment but don't want to be called an environmentalist - ok - i don't like the isms and ists either but if the shoe fits - no comment on max i notice - makes me think that you have a axe to grind! we all belong to a group - some bigger than others
It's been said the Rapa Nui felt the same thing as they chopped down the last tree.
i play hockey - in canada the expression is "if there were no beer there would be no hockey!"
You may be a Republican, but you're no Conservative.
Well, do you think the conservatives who DO like them are any better?
So,tell me why Sarah Palin is an "idiot" in your so-called conservative opinion,if you don't mind.
Well first of all, she's not too bright, secondly she's wayyyy too right wing
I suddenly have a newfound respect for utahdebater. I wish more conservatives would just open-up about what they really think here. It's really a mystery to me what conservatives think. That's why their thinking is so often steriotyped. Sad.
like what, i didnt see anything opened up, what does wayy to right wing mean exactly? is it similar to the republican nominees that speak in generalities offering more empty promises, and as of yet havent hit a specific issue on the head (with exception of honorable dr ron paul of course) ?
Well, we seek common ground, which means dialogue. That is the process, at least to some degree, I think.
We may agree that there are many problems but we usually differ on the solutions. In most cases, a liberal's cure is FAR worse than the disease.
Do you think it's good that 400 Americans own as much as half of the American population combined?
Who gives a crap? All though, it sure is a good day for me and my employees when one of them places a nice big order! If you want some of their money, do something constructive and earn it.
Okay, so you see the world exclusively through the lense of your own expierence, and that of your own relative success, and you don't really care if millions of people have been evicted, etc.
I don't know why more conservatives don't just come right out and say that if it's what they believe. If that's how you feel than that's how you feel. What I don't understand is why so many try to disguise their real thoughts with code words, obfuscation and sophistry. I don't like that because it's cowardly.
"and you don't really care if millions of people have been evicted, etc."
When did I state that?
When you said, "who gives a crap" about the issue of income dispairity, you certainly implied it.
You hear what you want to hear. You hear but you never listen.
Well, now I'm listening.
It's way late here. Ping me next time.
ok this is my personality and my take on things so prepare yourself for my sarcasm but... dialogue and right wing conservatism, wow doesnt that explain alot! LOL
There goes my genius out the window, I must be dumb.
I don't think you're dumb. Far from it. Anybody can get exasperated here.
Why hate. Wheres the love? Hate is not good.
Examples?
"she's not too bright"? " she's wayyyy too right wing"?
Well I guess you're not a Conservative but you sure are a great Lib.
I'm actually pretty moderate. Just cuz I think she's too right wing doesn't mean i'm liberal.
We are all liberal. We are all conservative. These words mean nothing. They are tools the powers that be use to confuse, distract, and divide us.
Well said. I think the American people have more in common than what the D's & R's would have you believe. They know that division keeps them powerful and us weaker. We must open our minds and unplug!
Yup, you sure are confused.
Hmm..and you are not? Enlighten me.
No and no.
Ok. My turn.
Liberal- adj - Open to political or social changes and reforms in favour of increased freedom or democracy.
Conservative- adj - Tending to resist change. Based on pessimistic assumptions.
Liberalism - Any political movement founded on the autonomy and personal freedom of the individual, progress and reform, and government by law with the consent of the governed.
Conservatism - A political philosophy that advocates traditional values. A risk-averse attitude or approach.
While I understand if you identify with one more than the other if you don't hold some qualities of both you are indeed confused.
Your definitions are either WAY out dated or simply bias; written as propaganda by a Liberal.
I am a fiscal conservative, Constitutional conservative, and in many aspects a social libertarian but also advocate traditional values.
Liberals want big government, which is always a restriction on freedom and liberty. Modern liberals are socialists.
I am a socialist. That doesn't mean I can't be conservative. I think your brain is dramatically simplifying these things because you are confused. Maybe someday you will realize that your person is a fraction of god incarnate and you will rise above your limited conceptions. Good luck, Godspeed, and Adieu.
If you are a socialist, I consider you my enemy. My goal is to defeat your ideology.
Ideology is a brain disease. My goal is to evolve.
You have devolved. Crawl back to your swamp.
Make it all about love and understanding, around the world that is right in front you.
[Removed]
Drop some A to that man. Or a pizza with massive shrooms. Don't trip too often or you'll scorch your brain man.
My mind is a fortress. I don't need your advice.
then there are members of the Native American church who use mescaline regularly for decades and score better on psychometric measures than square people...
Not that I'm encouraging because it isn't for everyone; but there is nothing to fear in transcending the ego for a few hours.
Yes sometimes I wish I was a native. I am studying anthropology and would love to hang out with them for a while. Mescaline is several times less toxic than alcohol and far far less addictive. I've never had the opportunity to try it but I plan on taking a similar compound on my birthday in a few days haha. I wish 'religious freedom' applied to individuals. If only...
haha. well, head up to Canada sometime. Peyote is legal for all, native or otherwise. :)
You just gotta find someone who grows it.
They exempted the entire genus of lophophora from the Controlled drugs & substances act, catch is it can't be imported so you have to find a local source. (not so difficult with the advent of the internet tho).
That is great! I did not know that.
few people do, it was due to efforts of native people in the 1970s. Oddly enough they decided to keep it legal for all people, not just natives. Reason was because they were worried if they made an exemption for natives, they would have other people claiming religious rights to use other substances.
Even few Canadians know about it, but its defiantly in the controlled drugs & substances act, and you can defiantly order it on the internet lol. And the sky has not fallen.
Smart move Canada haha. I think the san pedro cactus is semi-legal here or at least mostly legal and that has mescaline in it. The law is vague surrounding it so I am not entirely sure if it is only legal in plant form. I don't think it is as good of a source for mescaline as peyote though. I think one would have to eat like 12 inches of cactus to get the effect. They really only bother making substances illegal here if they become popular and enjoyable haha. I think the idea is if it is popular enough and they can make it 100+ times more valuable through the black market then the laws come about.
haha, yeah things are funny that way. Like you could buy fresh mushrooms in England until a few years ago. But then they started selling them in head shops and all the sudden increasing popularity is a big problem, even though there were no other problems. Silly people.
"Drop some A to that, man!" Ha, I got a little laugh outta that one.
What exactly makes her "too right wing"?
I get it,you're a RINO,that's cool I guess. Conservatives don't have a lot of respect for RINO's,me being one of them. No offense but Moderates are partly responsible for giving us Obama. Bush was a moderate,I found that out much too late.
Palin is a very intelligent Woman and Politician. I don't know WTF you base your opinion on. Your remark is nothing more then a Liberal insult.
Which makes me believe you're more Left than center/Moderate.
Palin is like Gingrich, what stupid people think smart looks like :)
Judging from that comment you're pretty much just plain ole stupid.
Sure let's not hear other points of views that may challenge our own. What a great idea you have. Now if you are talking spammers I agree with you.
Just an observation. It seems that those who disagree are labeled as trolls. Also, by attaching said trolls to extremist like Beck and Palin, you somehow negate their disagreements. This has little logic or a chance at positive change.
The ones who have "little logic" are the ones saying that people should be slaves to corporations. The ones saying we should take away women's rights to birth control in the name of "Religious freedom". The ones saying people should have a choice whether or not to join a union. They are the ones to worry about.
Odd, I did not recall writing any of that in my comment? The only one I disagree with is a persons right to join a union or not. Thought we wanted a free country? I guess I will now be labeled a troll or extreme Beck/Palin lover. By the way, grew up in a union family and worked for two different unions as well. Neither time was I forced to join.
Maybe you weren't forced to join. Maybe you like having your "rights". Well, how many times were you pressured to stop paying union dues? How many times were you pressured or threatened because you wanted to speak with a union representative over unfair working conditions? People often knuckle under when companies say "boo". That's why we need to keep the decision out of their hands.
Maybe I misunderstood you? I do not believe that one should be forced to join a union. However, if a union has a contract with a company, then I can understand that union workers would be the ones hired to work there. You just have to get a job somewhere else. I know that in my state, there are people trying to make it were all work has to be unionized. To me that is just not realistic or necessary. Especially in all fields of labor.
Well, if one worker goes without union membership, all because someone decided it was a "right" to not join, than his economic blood will be on your hands.
I could read into that comment several ways. Curious as to what you actually mean by that. Care to elaborate?
People need union membership. It is the best choice for everyone, so it is a no-brainer. Every worker needs to have union membership, because it will benefit them. There is no reason why it is a bad thing to be a member of a union, so there is no reason why it should be allowed no to be. Just like getting a doctor's visit every once in a while. We shouldn't let people not do it, because it is a good thing.
Unions in themselves can be just as corrupt as a company or a government. They are good and bad to all of the above. Being forced to join a union because someone else thinks "It's a good thing." is not what our country was founded on. Unions are for those who want to pull together to strengthen their voice. If an individual disagrees with that voice, they should not be forced to join. Understand that I am not anti-union, I just support the rights of the individual.
Does the constitution mention the word "individual" one time? No. It does not. It does, however, mention the "common good". The fact of the matter is, we get to decide what our neighbors do if we feel like it is a good thing. Besides, the country was founded by a bunch of knuckle-dragging slave owning neanderthals, so I don't see why we should keep doing what they say.
The U.S. Constitution mentions the rights of the "person" frequently. Common good is also considered. Specifically there are a Bill of Rights that express the rights of the individual. The reason being is that the majority is not always correct. It is these Bill of Rights that protect that. Otherwise, slavery could still be considered a good thing, because the majority thought that it was right. Gay marriage in California is being jeopardized because people want to put it to a vote. Does that somehow make gay marriage right or wrong based on the outcome? As far as your last comment, I have a very clear picture of the world that you would like to live in now. Respectfully, I disagree and will still fight for the right of the individual in balance with what is considered the common good. This is not an absolute black or white topic. There are shades of gray here and why we need to keep and strengthen our democracy.
To get in the middle of this, I would like to side with wellhungjury.
JuanFenito, you said: "They are the ones to worry about."
JuanFenito why are you worried? They are just other people living their lives, as you are with yours. We may not always agree with them. However, if they talk to us, it does not mean we should cease the use of intelligence and reason. Using insults will only further the divide.
JuanFenito, you will have a more enjoyable life, by taking the route of LOVE.
You must not see the news much on The Daily Kos. If you were truly informed about what is going on, you would not have any love left to give. The atrocities and destruction have become unbearable and it's time to do something about it.
What is The Daily Kos?
A blog. I get so angry when I read it I had to up my antidepressants. The things the corporation in this country do are despicable, all of them. there is not a corporation in this country that does not have the blood of the poor on their hands. Did you know that the people who run Wal-Mart are very wealthy?
OWH supporters...This is all part ot the future of the Occupy movement. We now shall move closer to the gates of the White House. We are preparing for this move as a write as our lawyers are regaining our property, and freeing the few brothers and sisters that were detained. OWH is now in full swing. We now tell this President and illegal congress that they are only guests in our house and we evict them. This is our message going forward. This is the world and direction of the GA DC...Occupy the White House Now!!!
[Removed]
Come on, man. Don't be a whiner. Yes, I wish the trolls would disappear, but you're making us look like a bunch of whiny brats.
Well, help me do something about the trolls instead of saying you want them to "dissappear". Volunteer to be a moderator, whatever. I want them gone.
I will be a moderator if I am asked.
[Removed]
You have posted the greatest post on this site. You want to change the WORLD!!!!!! but you have problem with a handfull of trolls. GOOD GOD,,, you are a whining momma's boy. I can image seeing you, "MOMMY,, I WANT THEM GOOOOONNNEEEEE. Then mommy,,, I want to change the WORLDDDDDDD" Your wearing a little bowtie. Please post something else so I can laugh. (and your gay)
You are a sick hater.
Does your mommy know your calling people haters on here? Same on you for making a mean statement. You have ZERO power of a couple of trolls and you want to CHANGE THE WORLD. You must be so miserable inside your little body. Mad at everyone and cant do a thing about it. CHANGE THE WORLDDDDDDD, yea right.
LMAO!
Make one issue your priority. Then begin discussion and post relevant material. You'll find yourself banned and on the "Troll List". The truth is, most of you have no idea what that means even tho it has a clear definition, look it up. You by party baiting are actually the troll, again, look it up. The movement has made it clear that Occupy has no party. You get lost, k? good.
I pity people like you who cannot see a movement like this for what it is. Can you stop hating on people trying to make positive change?
You mistake my complaints about this forum for complaints about the movement. Or maybe your connecting them purposely to give a false level of importance to this mismanaged forum. Either way, I have spent more time and resources on this movement than you have placed into anything your entire life. Check your self inflated ego at the Save button homie.
If you need to place that much time and effort into a movement, that usually means you need laxatives, buddy.
LMAO. At least you have a sense of humor.
Is it YOU that is making a positive change? What is it that you own that you want to change? Or is it that you hate us and want to change us? It is only POSITIVE if you like it?
It is for the better. People don't know how bad of a shape they're in. We need to let them know and correct their wrongdoings.
How old are you?
[Removed]
Has this become the nanny movement?
NOTES: Things to do this week. 1) Figure out how to deal with the half dozen trolls on here. 2) Change the WORLD.
Pinky and The Brain Intro
Maybe that should be the OWS theme song.
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
I have to know my enemy. So I probe sites such as these. I then find all of the individuals with progressive points of view regarding wealth redistribution. Then I kill them
That's right. Blood, gore, veins in my teeth. I mean kill. Kill! KILL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What do YOU mean,,, get lost? I think you guys were protesting to get our attention. Who were you protesting about if it was not us? You need to get lost or leave us alone and get off the streets.
I think YOU need to get off our forum!
Do you like the status quo?
Get off our streets and out of our parks and out of our pockets. There you go.
I think this topic of "get off our streets, get off our forum" could use an intelligent discussion. A discussion on the question of: exactly what is the definition of "Public Property"?
This site is public. It is not password protected. A park is owned by the tax payers and is protected by those that pay taxes for police protection.
Part of it is public - the ability to freely create an account and join into the discussion - that is "open to the public".
However, the website, the server that it runs on, the domain name, etc. is Not Public. Someone, somewhere owns the rights to it. If it were truly a "public site" then each individual would have a stake in the ownership of the system itself.
So you are saying the owners of this site has rights????? Is that the point you are making???? I'm not following what your point is. Kind of like a company owner should have the right to not allow unions to form????? That kind of right? Where a corporation owned by the stock holders that paid for the stock has the right to decide how that corporation should be run and not a bunch of hippies???? Is that your point or did I put you suddenly in a box?
In terms of whether or not this site is "public" - I am simply saying what I already wrote.
For an answer to another of your questions: "Should a company have the right to not allow unions to form?"
Of course not. In addition, it is not even within a company's power to prevent unions. They might try, but they ultimately cannot destroy the very labor force they seek to benefit from. The individual workers hold the natural rights to whether or not they join together with a common goal.
To address your last comment. Let's say,,, you have dreamed about starting your own company. For a year or two you have planned and investigated all aspects of this new company. For a couple of years you eat beans and rice to save up enough to start it. You put your savings into starting this new company. You are liable for the products or services you will be doing and hire expensive attorneys and paid for expensive insurance. You purchase the new equipment and pay huge amounts for getting the infrastructure ready. You prepay for utilities. Then you purchase the raw materials and pay taxes on everything you have purchased to date. You lay in bed every night worried about what may or may not happen after spending your life savings. Then,,,,,, you finally hire a few people that have done NOTHING during the two years you have gone through it. You hired someone that thinks like you. Then you walk in and say, "HEY DUMB SHIT,,, WE ARE STARTING A UNION,, ASS HOLE and there is NOTHING YOU can do about it." I assume YOU, being the liberal thinker you are,, you would think this was fine. People like YOU are the reason the MAJORITY hates unions and union workers.
I am for Individual Liberty and the Constitution of the United States of America.
In the scenario you provided, with myself as the company owner, I would adjust to whatever the free market dictated. If my current employees wanted to quit, I would attempt to find others.
You obviousily never started a company,,,,, it shows. You are a taker.
And why do you think that I have, as you say, "obviousily never started a company"?
Funny, you obviously do not know how to spell "obviousily".
You said that individual workers hold the natural rights to join together. No owner of a company would agree with you,,,, obviousily you never started a company,
Does an individual worker not have natural rights?
Yes. 1) Follow the company rules. 2) Leave and seek employment somewhere else. 3) Start their own company. So, as an employee,, if YOU want to the RIGHT to leave the company you are working for to go to another company for,,,,, maybe better pay,,,, then the company has a right to fire you too. It works both ways. If YOU want to union then I would suggest you start your own company and force all of the employees you hire to join a union and give them the power to keep or close the business. I wont give up that right.
Why the hostility? Are you opposed to different opinions? Are you so insecure in your ideology that you're pleading to be left unchallenged?
Why the bullshit? Honest question. Why are you here?
Having a different opinion is one thing. Having multiple IDs to act like an ass is a completely different problem. Doncha think?
Hey, I lashed out at thrasy and got banned. If you cannot tolerate it, find other forums. He lives on while anyone reacting to him gets banned. FYI.
Everyone goes off on Thrassy, he gets banned, and he manages to come back and bitch cry.
Richard, you got banned for spamming the forum. Plain and simple. I'm not a moderator, I don't have the power to ban you.
Really, Was I advertising a product or a tv show? What was the link about? Who was I posting it to? Leave out the context and justify it all you like. It's how I see and I called it as such. I can only hope you are shown the same understanding when you feel you have been unjustly penalized for something.
move along
No, you move along.
Are you a moderator around here? Please help with this sick group of losers.
When you say, "Why are you here?" the same question could be asked of you. Why are YOU protesting in our streets to gain our attention? We didnt invite you to take over the parks. We didnt invite you to chant. We didnt invite you to block ports. YOU CAME TO US. Why would you be upset if we are here,,,, because you started it.
Protesting occurs because you, obviously, didn't pay attention the first time around. Yeah? You failed to listen before. That is why protesting occurs in the first place. Yeah? Didn't need an invitation to protest, yeah?
Oh, I'm not upset that you are here. You just have no intention of adding to the discussions on solving the problems. You never have. So, why the bullshit? You refused to work on the issues before and you refuse to work on the issues now. So, why are you here?
We are here to sleep and crap in your little Pity Park. ........Mic check!
We (we) are (are) the Moral Common Sense! (the moral common sense!)
I'm here to excersise my civil disobedience. I have the same right to protest in what ever form I want to just as you do, in the streets, a park or on here. I dont have to agree with your ideas or direction. I dont agree with OWS. I know the purpose of OWS and it is simply a left wing agenda to raise taxes to support failed liberal agendas that forces people to COMPLY or not get government services. It encourages people to become part of a system that is controlled by rich liberals in government so they continue to be elected. There has not been one solution on this site to get people to climb out of the hole that was dug for them. I didnt fail to listen, I have my eyes open very wide and can see how Americans are not encourage to do better but to do worse so mother government will take care of them. If that is your way of life,,, FINE,,, go for it. I dont want my family or my children to look for holes I want them them to be encourage to climb to much greater heights. I'm protesting on here because your fight involves me and my taxes. Like the roach motel, They all go in,, but they dont come out.
Why the hostility? What do mean many Id's? I haven't acted like a ass. Why are you targeting me?
Why feign ignorance? Nobody is targeting you. Answer the questions.
What question? I'm here to exchange information why do you dislike me?
Having a different opinion is one thing. Having multiple IDs to act like an ass is a completely different problem. Doncha think?
I'm sorry you feel the need to attack me. I have no problem with you. Good luck,goodbye.
I'm not attacking you. I'm asking you a question.
Po' thang.
neonknight: I've been reading the "back and forth" starting from the very beginning....Ha, I'm laughing with you on this one! :)
You may not technically be "attacking" neonknight, but you are making an accusation....i.e. that he/she has multiple ids on this forum. Do you have proof of that?
[Removed]
Don't be ridiculous. I want discourse, not people calling me names.
You want discourse? Then start a thread about just how big govt handouts should be.